Assessing the Potential and Limitations of Leveraging Food Sovereignty to Improve Human Health

The Role of Agricultural Systems in Teaching Kitchens: An Integrative Review and Thoughts for the Future

Diet-related chronic disease is a public health epidemic in the United States. Concurrently, conventional agricultural and food production methods deplete the nutritional content of many foods, sever connections between people and the origin of their food, and play a significant role in climate change. Paradoxically, despite an abundance of available food in the US, many households are unable to afford or attain a healthful diet. The linkages between agriculture, health, and nutrition are undeniable, yet conventional agriculture and healthcare systems tend to operate in silos, compounding these pressing challenges. Operating teaching kitchens in collaboration with local agriculture, including farms, community gardens, vertical farms, and urban agriculture, has the potential to catalyze a movement that emphasizes the role of the food system in promoting human and planetary health, building resilient communities, and encouraging cross-disciplinary collaboration. This paper reviews the current state of agricultural systems, food is medicine, consumer behavior, and the roles within these sectors. This is followed by a series of case studies that fill the gaps between TKs and agriculture. The authors summarize opportunities to combine the knowledge and resources of teaching kitchens and agriculture programs, as well as challenges that may arise along the way.

Food Security Review Based on Bibliometrics from 1991 to 2021

Food security is related to human wellbeing and sustainable development and an important guarantee for world peace. In the context of global climate change, increased food demand, resource depletion, conflicts, and frequent public health emergencies, food security is widely seen as one of the top challenges. Food security research has obvious interdisciplinary characteristics, involving a wide range of fields. We analyzed the literature on food security in the Web of Science core collection from 1991 to 2021, using bibliometric methods with the aid of the Biblioshiny software package. By collecting, screening, analyzing, and visually expressing the literature data, the following conclusions were drawn: (1) In the past 30 years, the annual number of publications on food security increased. The period can be divided into three stages: 1991-2003 as the budding period, 2004-2012 as the development period, and 2013-2020 as the high-yield and active period. The top three journals discussing food security issues are Food Security, Sustainability, and Food Policy, and these journals focus on the publication of comprehensive views from interdisciplinary perspectives. (2) Studies on food security cover 138 countries or regions. The top three countries in terms of the number of published articles are the United States, the United Kingdom, and China. Among the top 20 countries in terms of the number of published articles, European countries are highlighted. (3) Climate change, food security, agriculture, policy, and management are the other high-frequency keywords in the field of food security; climate change occurred 321 times. The word sub-Saharan Africa also occurred more frequently, indicating that food security in sub-Saharan Africa has attracted wide attention. (4) The food security theme mapping clearly showed the research status and future development trends of various topics in the field. Currently, food production, climate change, and sustainable development are the most popular themes. Research on food sovereignty, ecological agriculture, child obesity, and other aspects is an emerging field. (5) We predict that in the future, the field of food security may focus on the expansion and improvement of the food security evaluation system, the balance between sustainable development and food security goals, the improvement of agricultural production and management efficiency, and the research on government policies and strategies. Our results provide a reference for grasping the current situation, key research direction, and development trend in the field of food security.

Toward Food Sovereignty: Transformative Agroecology and Participatory Action Research With Coffee Smallholder Cooperatives in Mexico and Nicaragua

The challenges that coffee smallholder livelihoods face suggest the need to move beyond incremental changes in production. Transformative agroecology offers a potential approach to guide systemic change to achieve food sovereignty among coffee smallholders and cooperatives. This work aims to understand the extent to which diversification practices among coffee smallholders can contribute to a transformative agroecology, and to what extent, participatory action research (PAR) projects may support related transformative processes. The PAR projects described in this paper took place over 3 years with participants associated with two smallholder cooperatives in Mexico, and Nicaragua. After establishing long-term partnerships among cooperatives and universities, we used a PAR approach to guide a mixed methods study that included 338 household surveys, 96 interviews, 44 focus group discussions, and participant observation during farmer-to-farmers exchanges. We found that, although coffee-producing households in both study sites report several diversification activities, more than 50% still face some period of food scarcity each year. In our reflections with farmers and staff from the participating cooperatives, that are also included as co-authors in this study, we conclude that coffee smallholders and cooperatives in both locations are in the early stages of developing a transformative agroecology, as a path toward food sovereignty. Several leverage points to achieve this include land access, native seed conservation, cultural attachment to certain diversification practices, and traditional diets. Some of the more significant challenges to advancing a more transformative agroecology are the prioritization of coffee as a crop (i.e., coffee specialization), and dependency on coffee income. Our PAR project also aimed to contribute to achieving change in the prevailing system through 1) capacity building with community facilitators/promoters, 2) co-creation of questions and knowledge relevant to the strategic planning by coffee cooperatives, 3) sharing farmer-to-farmer pedagogies across territories, and 4) the co-production of popular education material. We conclude that diversification remains an important agroecological strategy for smallholder commodity producers, as a way of achieving food sovereignty. Most of all, we find that achieving diversification is not a linear process, as there are many trade-offs, feedback loops, obstacles and opportunities that should be considered through long-term and collective approaches.

Food Sovereignty Indicators for Indigenous Community Capacity Building and Health

Food insecurity, defined as a lack of stable access to sufficient and nutritious food, is a global public health priority due to its relationships with diminished mental and physical human health. Indigenous communities experience disproportionality high rates of food insecurity as a byproduct of settler-colonial activities, which included forced relocation to rural reservation lands and degradation of traditional subsistence patterns. Many Indigenous communities have worked to revitalize their local food systems by pursuing food sovereignty, regularly expressed as the right and responsibility of people to have access to healthy and culturally appropriate foods, while defining their own food systems. Food sovereignty is a promising approach for improving health. However, limited literature is available that identifies the diverse practices of food sovereignty or strategies communities can implement to strengthen their food sovereignty efforts. This article reviews the scientific literature and highlights key indicators that may support community capacity building for food sovereignty and health. The seven indicators are: (1) access to resources, (2) production, (3) trade, (4) food consumption, (5) policy, (6) community involvement, and (7) culture. A total of 25 sub-indicators are outlined to allow communities to understand how an indicator is operationalized as well as explore their own community's progress within each indicator. It is not expected that every indicator and their subcategories will apply fully to any given Indigenous community, and the application of these indicators must be adapted for each community's local context, however the indicators may provide support for building and assessing efforts to create more sustainable Indigenous food systems.

A Scoping Review of the Use of Indigenous Food Sovereignty Principles for Intervention and Future Directions

Indigenous food sovereignty (IFS) represents a community-led movement with potential to reduce health inequities, but no scoping review of the impact of taking an IFS approach on intervention research has been conducted. This review sought to: 1) describe intervention studies that employ IFS principles, and 2) describe the impact of studies using IFS principles on food access, eating patterns, diet quality, physical activity, and health. Through a literature review, 4 IFS principles were identified: 1) community ownership, 2) inclusion of traditional food knowledge, 3) inclusion and promotion of cultural foods, and 4) environmental/intervention sustainability. Twenty intervention studies published between January 1, 2000 and February 5, 2020 were included. Most of the studies that scored high in IFS principles saw a positive impact on diet. This review found evidence supporting the value of IFS principles in the development, implementation, and evaluation of health interventions for Indigenous communities.

Sustainable Agri-Food Systems: Environment, Economy, Society, and Policy

Agri-food systems (AFS) have been central in the debate on sustainable development. Despite this growing interest in AFS, comprehensive analyses of the scholarly literature are hard to find. Therefore, the present systematic review delineated the contours of this growing research strand and analyzed how it relates to sustainability. A search performed on the Web of Science in January 2020 yielded 1389 documents, and 1289 were selected and underwent bibliometric and topical analyses. The topical analysis was informed by the SAFA (Sustainability Assessment of Food and Agriculture systems) approach of FAO and structured along four dimensions viz. environment, economy, society and culture, and policy and governance. The review shows an increasing interest in AFS with an exponential increase in publications number. However, the study field is north-biased and dominated by researchers and organizations from developed countries. Moreover, the analysis suggests that while environmental aspects are sufficiently addressed, social, economic, and political ones are generally overlooked. The paper ends by providing directions for future research and listing some topics to be integrated into a comprehensive, multidisciplinary agenda addressing the multifaceted (un)sustainability of AFS. It makes the case for adopting a holistic, 4-P (planet, people, profit, policy) approach in agri-food system studies.

The impact of interventions in the global land and agri-food sectors on Nature's Contributions to People and the UN Sustainable Development Goals

Interlocked challenges of climate change, biodiversity loss, and land degradation require transformative interventions in the land management and food production sectors to reduce carbon emissions, strengthen adaptive capacity, and increase food security. However, deciding which interventions to pursue and understanding their relative co-benefits with and trade-offs against different social and environmental goals have been difficult without comparisons across a range of possible actions. This study examined 40 different options, implemented through land management, value chains, or risk management, for their relative impacts across 18 Nature's Contributions to People (NCPs) and the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). We find that a relatively small number of interventions show positive synergies with both SDGs and NCPs with no significant adverse trade-offs; these include improved cropland management, improved grazing land management, improved livestock management, agroforestry, integrated water management, increased soil organic carbon content, reduced soil erosion, salinization, and compaction, fire management, reduced landslides and hazards, reduced pollution, reduced post-harvest losses, improved energy use in food systems, and disaster risk management. Several interventions show potentially significant negative impacts on both SDGs and NCPs; these include bioenergy and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, afforestation, and some risk sharing measures, like commercial crop insurance. Our results demonstrate that a better understanding of co-benefits and trade-offs of different policy approaches can help decision-makers choose the more effective, or at the very minimum, more benign interventions for implementation.

No land for food: prevalence of food insecurity in ethnic communities enclosed by sugarcane monocrop in Colombia

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate how the food systems in areas close to sugarcane monocrops influence the prevalence of food insecurity (FI) among three ethnic communities in the upper Cauca River basin of Colombia.

METHODS

We developed a mixed methodology study at three rural zones located in the departments of Cauca and Valle del Cauca, Colombia, using a household survey to establish the level of FI, and semi-structured interviews with key community actors.

RESULTS

These three ethnic communities have a high prevalence of FI (> 70%) that was found to be associated with economic income, social security, gender, the presence of minors in the home, refrigerator in operation and ownership of the land. Loss of food sovereignty was associated with the sale and rental of land.

CONCLUSIONS

The sugarcane monocrop has contributed to environmental crises, spatial confinement and sociocultural disruption in ethnic territories; by renting, selling or leasing their land to the industrial production of sugarcane, traditional practices of food production and self-consumption have been profoundly transformed. Ethnic cultures are endangered, while food security and sovereignty of indigenous and black communities have been negatively affected.

Examining Indigenous food sovereignty as a conceptual framework for health in two urban communities in Northern Ontario, Canada

While land is a nexus for culture, identity, governance, and health, as a concept land is rarely addressed in conversations and policy decisions about Indigenous health and well-being. Indigenous food sovereignty, a concept which embodies Indigenous peoples' ability to control their food systems, including markets, production modes, cultures and environments, has received little attention as a framework to approach Indigenous health especially for Indigenous people living in urban spaces. Instead, discussions about Indigenous food sovereignty have largely focused on global and remote and rural communities. Addressing this gap in the literature, this article presents exploratory work conducted with Waasegiizhig Nanaandawe'iyewigamig and Shkagamik-Kwe Health Centre, two Indigenous-led Aboriginal Health Access Centres in urban service centers located in Northern Ontario, Canada.

Staple crops biofortified with increased vitamins and minerals: considerations for a public health strategy

Biofortification of staple crops has been proposed as a strategy to address micronutrient malnutrition, particularly with respect to insufficient intake of vitamin A, iron, zinc, and folate. The World Health Organization, in collaboration with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the Sackler Institute for Nutrition Science at the New York Academy of Sciences, convened a technical consultation entitled "Staple Crops Biofortified with Vitamins and Minerals: Considerations for a Public Health Strategy" in April 2016. Participants of the consultation reviewed the definition of biofortification of staple crops, patterns of crops production, processing, consumption, seed varieties, and micronutrient stability and bioavailability, as well as farmers' adoption and acceptability of the modified crops. Also discussed were economic, environmental, safety, and equity aspects of biofortified crops, as well as legal, policy, regulatory, and ethical issues for the implementation of biofortification strategies in agriculture and nutrition. Consultation working groups identified important and emerging technical issues, lessons learned, and research priorities to better support the evidence of improved nutrition and unintended adverse effects of biofortification. This paper provides the background and rationale of the technical consultation, synopsizes the presentations, and provides a summary of the main considerations proposed by the working groups.